As the conflict with Iran continues, many elements of an eventual deal have been explored. Issues such as nuclear weapons development, missile production, uranium divestment and enrichment, foreign proxy financing, as well as activities in the region by Israel and Arab countries, have come under scrutiny. Meanwhile, it is widely recognized that any deal with the Iranian regime is suspect; Compliance has always been questionable, and efficient supervision creates an even greater number of problems.
From the beginning, the concept of ‘regime change’ has received a lot of attention. For some, it means the end of the 1979 Iranian Revolution. For others, it means the complete elimination of all those who led and participated in the Iranian Revolution for decades. For others, the country may be content with a mere change of leadership, assuming, as with the U.S. intervention in Venezuela, that new leaders can emerge who will lead the nation toward greater cooperation with the U.S., turn away from fomenting terror through proxies in other countries, and, because of an improved economy, be open to granting greater individual freedoms to the general population.
One focus that has been completely absent from the public discussion concerns the regime’s own constitution and whether amendments, if not a full revision, should be on the table. Of course, a change in a document does not guarantee a meaningful change in behavior. Nevertheless, the not agree to make specific changes, if not a completely new framework, shows that real change of the type that much of the world would appreciate is unlikely.
MICHAEL OREN: IRAN HAS BEEN WAR AGAINST AMERICA FOR 47 YEARS – TIME TO END IT
The existing constitution, drafted in 1979 and then amended in 1989, outlines a vision completely incompatible with Western principles and which has given direction and reason to everything the regime has sought throughout its forty-seven years of existence. It also gives meaning to what is often mistaken for mere hyperbolic cheerleading: “Death to America.”
While America was built on notions of liberty, individual liberties and limited government control, the Islamic Republic is based on a global totalitarian vision. Essentially, it seeks an Islamic world government derived from the principles of the Quran and Sharia. It wants to help all similar revolutionary efforts around the world, and justifies its support for its allies and other activities abroad. Moreover, it was hoped that this vision would become a reality by the end of the 20th century, which certainly explains the unquenchable hunger for nuclear weapons as the optimal, most accelerated path to overtaking all other forms of rule.
AMB. GORDON SONDLAND: THE TRUTH ABOUT IRAN’S ‘IMMINENT THREAT’ THAT POLITICIANS ARE TO ADMIT
Here are just a few passages from the preamble and the articles themselves (italics added):
“The Constitution, together with other Islamic and popular movements, will strive to pave the way for the formation of a single world community (in accordance with the Qur’anic verse ‘This community is one community, and I am your Lord, so worship Me’ [21:92]), and to ensure the continuation of the struggle for the liberation of all deprived and oppressed peoples in the country the world.”
The Constitution was framed ‘with every hope that this century will witness the establishment of a universal holy government and the downfall of all others.“
The army and the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps “will be responsible not only for guarding and maintaining the country’s borders, but also for fulfilling the ideological mission of jihad in God’s way, that is: expanding the sovereignty of God’s law throughout the world…“
“With due attention to the Islamic content of the Iranian revolution, the constitution provides the necessary basis to guarantee the continuation of the revolution at home and abroad.“
“…formulate the country’s foreign policy based on Islamic criteria, brotherly devotion to all Muslims, and unconditional support for the freedom fighters of the world.“
The constitution not only dictates activities within the territory; it is both offensive and defensive. Again, its reach is global and not limited to the Middle East as many in the media try to claim. The Lesser and Greater Satans are the main enemies precisely because they represent the greatest obstacles. It was Iran that declared war on America decades ago; Until the current administration, it has been the US that has minimized its importance while hoping to negotiate Iran peacefully away from its mission. For those wondering how Iran poses a threat to the US, its primary purpose requires the “demise” of the US
THE IRANIAN REGIME WAS BUILT ON ‘CRUEL ANTI-SEMITISM’ AFTER THE ISLAMIC REVOLUTION OF 1979
The Constitution is based in part on the belief in “the return to God in the Hereafter, and the constructive role of this belief in the course of man’s ascension to God.” The official religion is the Twelver Ja’fari Shia school, which is “remain forever unchangeable.This school generally awaits the return of its Mahdi, similar to the Messiah, and encourages global chaos, which is necessary to hasten his appearance. It is this global chaos that underlies much of what the regime has consistently nurtured.
Negotiations are difficult and generally only those directly involved have a complete picture of all concerns, issues, relative influences and risks. The result is that the public is often unaware of the many real limitations and possibilities that the parties have. As a result, many necessary trade-offs are often not understood by those outside the central negotiators.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS ADVICE
Nevertheless, the past century, as well as the beginning of this century, has taught us that we must trust the way the enemy describes himself. From Hitler and Stalin to all the Western communists, Mao to the CCP and the Islamists, we have learned that it is important to believe what they tell us. The Iranian Constitution does just that, telling us exactly who the regime is and what it wants, and any meaningful public debate must be fully informed by it.
Any deal with this regime is suspect given its history and its adherence to the Prophet Mohammed’s handling of ceasefires; nothing guarantees compliance. But more importantly, Iran’s failure to agree to many provisions of the constitution will reveal exactly what kind of “regime change” will result.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The failure to adequately address the Constitution will ultimately be seen as acceptance and ratification of the extreme principles underlying all its provisions. And should it be determined that the best path forward is an agreement with expiration dates, the Constitution, unchanged, tells us exactly what will happen once those expiration dates have passed.
Again, constitutional changes do not guarantee real change, but the inability to make changes is unlikely to guarantee real change. It is therefore imperative that public attention is focused on this before a final agreement is reached.
